The American Psychiatric Association (APA) has updated its Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, including with new information specifically addressed to individuals in the European Economic Area. As described in the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, this website utilizes cookies, including for the purpose of offering an optimal online experience and services tailored to your preferences.

Please read the entire Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. By closing this message, browsing this website, continuing the navigation, or otherwise continuing to use the APA's websites, you confirm that you understand and accept the terms of the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, including the utilization of cookies.

×
Published Online:https://doi.org/10.1176/ps.45.5.466

Legislatures, professional groups, and mental health consumers across the United States are currently engaged in a debate about the need for change in civil cormitment procedures. The authors summarize modifications of legislation and judicial opinion in the history of Oregon's civil commitment procedures from 1853 to the present to show that changes in civil commitment reflect broader shifts in the social and political aspects of the mental health system. Many current issues in civil commitment, such as the question of a patient's competency to make treatment decisions, are not new, and they are likely to continue to be controversial as mental health systems attempt to balance concerns about the liberty interests of mentally ill persons with concerns about providing appropriate treatment for mental illness.

Access content

To read the fulltext, please use one of the options below to sign in or purchase access.